More handpicked essays just for you.
Social And Economic Effects Of First World War
The effects of war
Social And Economic Effects Of First World War
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
War is the bane of humanity’s existence, it is an indiscriminate killer, just as deadly as disease and famine. While today most people are more inclined towards pacifism than belligerency, in the past war was seen as normal and necessary for progress and perseverance. Europe in particular saw war as tool for supremacy inspired by the wars and conquest of their Greek, Roman, and Anglo Saxon ancestors. Heinrich von Treitschke’s Place of Warfare in the State published sometime after 1896 and The Young People of Today published in 1912 by Henri Massis and Alfred de Tarde emphasize war as a means of progression and the zeitgeist of the times. At the turn of the 19th Century, an already war torn Europe romanticized the idea of war and saw it essential …show more content…
The Young People of Today, a series of opinion polls conducted among young educated Frenchmen by Henri Massis and Alfred de Tarde find romantic sentiments for war much like von Treitschke. The two authors interviewed a professor who tried to explain that there were in fact unjust wars, however, according to the professor, “the class obviously did not follow me; they rejected that distinction” (Massis and de Tarde 224). Massis and de Tarde go on to write about the many young men who left their high studies to pursue lives as soldiers because for them “it is not enough, for them to learn history: they are making it” (Massis and de Tarde 224). War was not only heroic and noble, but it also had its benefits, too. Heinrich von Treitschke lamented the fact that Germany lagged behind England and France when it came to colonization. The German historian argued that only through war could Germany colonize places untouched by the French and British. Colonization through war, according to von Treitschke, would ensure the perseverance of Germany among the superpowers of Europe and abroad. He even suggested that the next war fought by Germany “must, if possible, be the acquisition of a colony of some sort” (von Treitschke
Guy Sajer’s The Forgotten Soldier is a work notable not only for its vivid and uncompromising account of his experience as a member of the Wehrmacht in World War II, but also for its subtle and incisive commentary about the very nature of war itself. What is perhaps most intriguing about Sajer’s novel is his treatment of the supposedly “universal” virtues present within war such as professionalism, patriotism, camaraderie, and self-sacrifice. Sajer introduces a break between how war is thought about in the abstract and how it has actually been conducted historically.
According to Christopher and James Collier,”War turns men into beasts.” It is true because many people are willing to
In the history of modern western civilization, there have been few incidents of war, famine, and other calamities that severely affected the modern European society. The First World War was one such incident which served as a reflection of modern European society in its industrial age, altering mankind’s perception of war into catastrophic levels of carnage and violence. As a transition to modern warfare, the experiences of the Great War were entirely new and unfamiliar. In this anomalous environment, a range of first hand accounts have emerged, detailing the events and experiences of the authors. For instance, both the works of Ernst Junger and Erich Maria Remarque emphasize the frightening and inhumane nature of war to some degree – more explicit in Jünger’s than in Remarque’s – but the sense of glorification, heroism, and nationalism in Jünger’s The Storm of Steel is absent in Remarque’s All Quiet on the Western Front. Instead, they are replaced by psychological damage caused by the war – the internalization of loss and pain, coupled with a sense of helplessness and disconnectedness with the past and the future. As such, the accounts of Jünger and Remarque reveal the similar experiences of extreme violence and danger of World War I shared by soldiers but draw from their experiences differing ideologies and perception of war.
Between the years of 1914 to 1918, the whole of Europe was locked in arms, not only for pride but mostly for survival. The years of war brought devastation upon all societies. Men were massacred in droves, food stuff dwindled, and at times an end seemed non-existent. The foundation of the first Great War, one can muse, began as a nationalistic race between rival nations. By the onset of 1914, once the Archduke Frendinad had been assassinated in Saravejo, the march for war became not just a nationalistic opinion, but now a frenzy to fight. In battle, unlike previous wars, new weaponry caused drastic alterations in strategy. No longer will armies stand to face their rivals on the plains. Now the war will be fought in trenches, hidden underground from the new, highly accurate artillery. In many respects, World War I was a war of artillery, gas, and mechanization. Except as new weapons were becoming essential for battle, the leaders, on all sides, appeared too inept to fight this new style of warfare. Generals, or any leader for that matter higher in the chain of command, sent their troops in massive assaults. Regardless of their losses there were no deviations from the main ideology of sending massive waves of men and shells to take a position. On an individual level, the scene of repeated assaults and mayhem of the front line did little to foster hope for their superiors or even for the naiveté of their fellow countrymen who were not fighting. I submit that in times of sheer madness and destitution, as during World War I, men banded together to form make-shift families for support and companionship when all seemed lost; as exemplified in the novel All Quiet on the Western Front.
In the books All Quiet on the Western Front by Erich Maria Remarque and The Wars by Timothy Findley, there is clear evidence of the nature of war. With all the efforts of preparation, discipline, and anticipation, false hopes were created for the young individuals, who leave the battlefields with numerous emotional and physical scars. The propaganda and disciplinary training to convince naïve young men to go to battle to fight for their country, the death of their comrades, and the physical breakdown are all part of twentieth century warfare.
In All Quiet on the Western Front, it becomes very apparent that some of the soldiers do not feel as if World War I was their fight, when comrades begin discussing the origin of war. One comrade, Albert states that a war is initiated by “one country badly offending the other” (204). This lead to a discussion over why the soldiers are fighting when truly it is one person or a small group of people that are directly offended by an opposing group in a similar position of power. Therefore, why must they discover the true horrors of war while simultaneously putting their lives on the line, when the ones who began the predicament, propelled false advertisement with propagandas that romanticized and glorified war don’t have to live as if the next second may be their
Heinrich von Treitschke is a cause of World War II because of his idea that imperialism is a viable and practical way to further the common good, and strengthen a nation. This appeared in the writings of leaders, such as Mussolini and Hitler, just before World War II, focusing on the idea that, “Only the truly great and powerful states ought to exist” (Treitschke 293). Mussolini believed that war was the greatest measure of the greatness of a country and its people (399). Mein Kampf written by Hitler, echoes Treitschke in the line, “The stronger must dominate and must not blend with the weaker orders and sacrifice their powers” (401).
War deprives soldiers of so much that there is nothing more to take. No longer afraid, they give up inside waiting for the peace that will come with death. War not only takes adolescence, but plasters life with images of death and destruction. Seeger and Remarque demonstrate the theme of a lost generation of men in war through diction, repetition, and personification to relate to their readers that though inevitable and unpredictable, death is not something to be feared, but to calmly be accepted and perhaps anticipated. The men who fight in wars are cast out from society, due to a misunderstanding of the impact of such a dark experience in the formative years of a man’s life, thus being known as the lost generation.
C.S. Lewis, a highly praised writer and theologist, both now and in the 1930’s, wrote a sermon for the Church of St. Mary the virgin on the subject of studies and armed conflicts. The sermon, taking place at a time when war was reemerging into the world, was an answer to a question most young people were asking. Whether or not they should stay in school or if they should enter into a war like some of their lesser educated compatriots. The Essay “Learning in Wartime”, written by C.S. Lewis, is an excellent sermon upon the morals of war and the studies of school, explaining the religious aspect of both. Though C.S. Lewis does make it clear towards the end of the sermon which side he is on, an earlier stance would have been more appreciated.
Nationalism influenced people’s thoughts about war, twisting their minds to believe that their government and military was supreme and would win a war quickly. Because “most European countries, with the exception of France and Prussia, had not had any major wars within the 19th century, they stepped into the 20th century thinking that they were immune to defeat. This idea of immunity developed as countries forgot of their past wars and sufferings. The British were confident in their naval forces, the Germans in their arms and ships, and the Russians thought their land was protected by God. Citizens strongly believed that their country was the best and would do just about anything to help their country. It became a school boy’s duty to enlist in the army upon his graduation. As Erich Maria Remarque states in his book, All Quiet on the Western Front, the “young men of twenty... whom Kantorek calls the ‘Iron Youth,’” are the ones sent off to war in Germany. Their teachers drilled this message into their minds from a young age. The boys were told that it was their duty to their country to fight. Zara Steiner, British Historian, related that British teachers were told “to teach boys that success in w...
Carl von Clausewitz, “What is War?” On War. Edited and translated by Michael Howard and Peter Paret, 89-112. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1976.
Every day we are surrounded by stories of war. In fact, we have become so accustomed to it, that we are now entertained by it. Video games, movies, and books filled with heroes who once dominated the battlefields. However it is constantly stated, “no good comes from war.” Even famous songs state “war... what is it good for… absolutely nothing.” But what if war was actually necessary? Throughout history, we see examples of the good things wars have brought. War has freed slaves, modernized medicine, brought down evil empires, and even brought countries together
War is a hard thing to describe. It has benefits that can only be reaped through its respective means. Means that, while necessary, are harsh and unforgiving. William James, the author of “The Moral Equivalent of War”, speaks only of the benefits to be had and not of the horrors and sacrifices found in the turbulent times of war. James bears the title of a pacifist, but he heralds war as a necessity for society to exist. In the end of his article, James presents a “war against nature” that would, in his opinion, stand in war’s stead in bringing the proper characteristics to our people. However, my stance is that of opposition to James and his views. I believe that war, while beneficial in various ways, is unnecessary and should be avoided at all costs.
The definiton of war will never change. Its ideal prupose throughly is to cause pain of those who go through it or who are somehow involved. Through my prespective, I believe we need less hostility and use other inititatives and methods of reasoning and resolving problems rather than create brutality and increase death in this world. This book, its descriptions, but most importantly, Erich Maria Remarque, has significantly suceeded in emphasizing an in-dept overlook and understandment of what the outcome of war turns out to be which can also be associated with its supporting literature. We cannot prove anything through war; the only thing we have proven is how low us humans in general have sunk in resolving conflicts. Anybody has the potential power to kill someone through a simple pull of a trigger.
War has been around for centuries. From the time modern civilizations began, war has played an integral part in human history. It shaped the world into the modern world we live in. War has been said to be a great motivator, for example, the Great Wall of China was built to fend off the attackers from the north. However, the negative aspects of war far outweighs any positive effects it might have. The destruction of civilizations, cities and countries, mass killings of men, woman and children alike, the disastrous effect it has on economy and the after effects of war can last for centuries.